Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T07:08:40.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aggression at the service delivery interface: Do you see what I see?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Loraleigh Keashly  and
Joel H Neuman
Loraleigh Keashly
Affiliation:
Department of Communication, Wayne State University, Detroit MI, USA
Joel H Neuman
Affiliation:
School of Business, State University of New York at New Paltz, New Paltz NY, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aggression at the service delivery interface (the point of contact between service provider and service recipient) has become a focus of much recent research attention. However, much of what we know is based on cross-sectional survey data – which tells us little about the underlying dynamics within specific aggressive incidents. Further, these data are often collected from the perspective of the service provider alone. For this study, we focused on specific hostile interactions during the delivery of healthcare services and gathered data from the perspectives of service providers and service recipients. Drawing on interviews with US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) staff and US military veterans, we categorised and compared each party's attributions for the initiation of hostile (unpleasant) encounters. We found that staff and veterans had different perspectives on the nature of precipitating factors and that the initial attribution for the event was linked to differences in subsequent responding. These findings are discussed in terms of their insight into the temporal dynamics of aggressive events and their implications for the prevention and management of hostility at the service delivery interface.

Keywords

workplace aggressiondynamics of aggressionmanagement of aggressionconflictpatient–staff interactionshealthcare delivery
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , May 2008 , pp. 180 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, CA, Anderson, KB and Deuser, WE. (1996) Examining an affective aggression framework: Weapon and temperature effects on aggressive thoughts, affect and attitudes, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22: 366–376.Google Scholar
Anderson, KB, Anderson, CA, Dill, KE and Deuser, WE (1998) The interactive relations between trait hostility, pain and aggressive thoughts, Aggressive Behavior 24: 161–171.Google Scholar
Andersson, LM and Pearson, CM (1999) Tit-for-tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace, Academy of Management Review 24: 452–471.Google Scholar
Baron, RA and Bell, PA(1975) Aggression and heat: Mediating effects of prior provocation and exposure to an aggressive model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 825–832.Google Scholar
Baron, RA and Neuman, JH (1996) Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence on their relative frequency and potential causes, Aggressive Behavior 22: 161–173.Google Scholar
Baumeister, RF, Stillwell, A and Wotman, SR (1990) Victim and perpetrator accounts of interpersonal conflict: Autobiographical narratives about anger, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59: 994–1005.Google Scholar
Beale, D, Cox, T, Clarke, D, Lawrence, C and Leather, P (1998) Temporal architecture of violent incidents, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 3: 65–82.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, L (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and reformulation. Psychological Bulletin 106; 59–73.Google Scholar
Buckley, MR, Fedor, DB, Veres, JG, Wiese, DS and Carraher, SM (1998) Investigating newcomer expectations and job-related outcomes, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 452–461.Google Scholar
Eisenberger, R, Lynch, P, Aselage, J and Rohdieck, S (2004). Who takes the most revenge? Individual differences in negative reciprocity norm endorsement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30: 787–799.Google Scholar
Fedor, DB, Buckley, MR and Davis, WD (1997) A model of the effects of realistic job previews, International Journal of Management 14: 211–221.Google Scholar
Felson, RB and Steadman, HJ (1983) Situational factors in disputes leading to criminal violence, Criminology 21: 59–74.Google Scholar
Folger, R and Skarlicki, D (1998) A popcorn metaphor for employee aggression. In Griffin, RW, O'Leary-Kelly, AM and Collins, JM (Eds.), Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Violent and deviant behavior (Vol. 23 Part A, pp. 43–81). Stanford, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Fox, S and Spector, PE (1999) A model of work frustration and aggression, Journal of Organisational Behavior 20: 915–931.Google Scholar
Fox, S, Spector, PE and Miles, D (2001) Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in response to job stressors and organisational justice: Some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions, Journal of Vocational Behavior 59: 1–19.Google Scholar
Freeman, C, Fox, S, Burr, B and Santasine, J (1996) Workplace violence in federal agencies. In VandenBos, GR and Bulatao, EQ (Eds) Violence on the Job: Identifying risks and developing solutions, pp. 199–206, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Glick, WH, Huber, GP, Miller, CC, Doty, DH and Sutcliffe, KM (1990). Studying changes in organisational design and effectiveness: Retrospective event histories and periodic assessments, Organization Science 1: 293–312.Google Scholar
Glomb, TM (2002) Workplace aggression: Informing conceptual models with data from specific encounters. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7: 20–36.Google Scholar
Gouldner, AW (1960) The norm of reciprocity, American Sociological Review 25: 161–178.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J and Alge, BJ (1998) Aggressive reactions to workplace injustice. In Griffin, RW, O'Leary-Kelly, A and Collins, J (Eds.), Dysfunctional behavior in organizations: Violent and deviant behavior Vol. 23, pp. 83–117, JAI Press, Stamford, CT.Google Scholar
Harris, MB (1993). How provoking! What makes men and women angry? Aggressive Behavior 19: 199–211Google Scholar
Hoad, CD (1993). Violence at work: Perspectives from research among 20 British employers. Security Journal 4: 64–86.Google Scholar
Hsiu-Fand, H and Shannon, SE (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15: 1277–1289.Google Scholar
Jones, EE and Nisbett, RE (1971) The Actor and the Observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ.Google Scholar
Keashly, L (2001) Interpersonal and systemic aspects of emotional abuse at work: The target's perspective, Violence and Victims 16: 233–268.Google Scholar
Kelley, HH (1971) Attribution in Social Interaction, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ.Google Scholar
Lanza, M and Kayne, HL (1995). Patient assault: A comparison of patient and staff perceptions. Issues in Mental Health Nursing 16: 129–141.Google Scholar
Lee, F and Robinson, RJ (2000). An attributional analysis of social accounts: Implications of playing the blame game. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30: 1853–1879.Google Scholar
Miller, NE, Sears, RR, Mowrer, OH, Doob, LW and Dollard, J (1941) The frustration-aggression hypothesis, Psychological Review 48: 337–342.Google Scholar
Mueller, CW (1983) Environmental stressors and aggressive behavior. In Geen, RG and Donnerstein, EI (Eds.), Aggression: Theoretical and empirical reviews Vol. 2, pp. 51–76, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Neuman, JH and Baron, RA (1997) Aggression in the workplace. In Giacalone, R and Greenberg, J (Eds.), Antisocial Behavior in Organizations, pp. 37–67, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
Neuman, JH and Baron, RA (2003) Social antecedents of bullying: A social interactionist perspective. In Einarsen, S, Hoel, H, Zapf, D and Cooper, CL (Eds.), Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace: International perspectives in research and practice, pp. 185–202, Taylor and Francis, London.Google Scholar
Northwestern National Life (1993) Fear and Violence in the Workplace: A survey documenting the experience of American workers, Minneapolis, MNGoogle Scholar
Pruitt, DG and Rubin, JZ (1986) Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement, Random House, New York.Google Scholar
Salin, D (2003 Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations 56: 1213–1232.Google Scholar
Schat, A and Kelloway, EK (2006) Training as a workplace aggression intervention strategy. In Kelloway, EK, Barling, J and Hurrell, JJ (Eds) Handbook of Workplace Violence, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
Spector, PE (1997) The role of frustration in antisocial behavior at work. In Giacalone, RA and Greenberg, J (Eds.), Antisocial Behavior in Organizations, pp. 1–17, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
Tedeschi, JT and Felson, RB (1994) Violence, Aggression and Coercive Actions, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Wanous, JP (1973) Effects of realistic job preview on job acceptance, job attitudes and job survival, Journal of Applied Psychology 58: 327–332.Google Scholar
Wanous, JP (1980) Organisational Entry: Recruitment, selection and socialization of newcomers, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
Wanous, JP (1989) Installing a Realistic Job Preview: Ten tough choices, Personnel Psychology 42: 117–134.Google Scholar
Weiss, HM and Cropanzano, R (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research in Organisational Behavior (Vol. 18, pp. 1–74). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Zapf, D and Gross, C (2001). Conflict escalation and coping with workplace bullying: A replication and extension. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology 10: 497–523.Google Scholar